Judgments affirmed.
Defendant moved to suppress certain oral and written confessions on the ground that they were involuntary, having resulted from beatings. The hearing court properly denied this motion, especially in light of the fact that when arraigned on the day after the alleged beatings, defendant did not call these beatings to the attention of either the arraigning Judge or to his attorney who stood next to him ( United States ex rel. Smith v Follette, 268 F. Supp. 751, 753, aff'd. 405 F.2d 1199). In addition, the trial court's charge, when read as a whole, imparted the correct standard that the jury should apply in its determination whether the confessions were voluntary (see People v Hall, 82 A.D.2d 838; Simmons v Dalsheim, 543 F. Supp. 729, affd 702 F.2d 423). We have reviewed defendant's other contentions and find them to be without merit. Boyers, J.P., Rubin, Lawrence and Eiber, JJ., concur.